ML Analysis — VIA LINDA BEHAVIORAL HOSPITAL
CCN 034040 | Clustering + Distress + RCM Opportunity
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
Investability Score
Speculative — only pursue if turnaround thesis is strong and entry multiple reflects risk.
38
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health4/25
RCM Upside20/25
Market Position2/20
Demand Defensibility8/15
Operational Efficiency4/15
Entry Multiple: 6.0x – 8.5x
Est. MOIC: 1.5x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Expenses exceed revenue
Catalysts:
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-7.1%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -25.9%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-35.4%, 21.2%]. P44 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 217037.846 | -0.1902 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 273302.596 | +0.1705 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.351 | -0.0431 | Higher Reimbursement Quality decreases predicted m | |
| State Peer Margin | -0.008 | +0.0279 | Higher State Peer Margin increases predicted margi | |
| Bed Utilization Value | 156928.216 | -0.0238 | Lower Bed Utilization Value decreases predicted ma |
Turnaround: 38%Turnaround possible (38%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on improving Revenue/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$365K
RCM Opportunity
D
Opportunity Grade
-22.7%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
AZ distress rate: 35.5%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.723 | -0.184 | ▼ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.026 | -0.052 | ▼ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 217037.846 | +0.080 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 52.000 | -0.013 | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.361 | -0.004 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $365K
Current margin: -25.9%
Projected margin: -22.7%
Grade: D
Comps: 44
Gap analysis vs P75 peers with 60% closure assumption. Confidence-weighted by lever implementation difficulty.
| Lever | Current | Benchmark | Gap | Impact | Confidence | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.361 | 0.546 | 18.6% | $245K | 65% | 18mo |
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.723 | 0.741 | 1.8% | $120K | 55% | 24mo |
Predicted RCM Performance (Public Data Only)
B
RCM Grade
Average RCM profile — some improvement opportunities. Standard diligence scope recommended.
| Metric | Predicted | 90% CI | Percentile | Assessment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Denial Rate | 25.0% | [2.0%, 25.0%] | P83 | Below average — denial rate suggests RCM improvement opportu |
| Days in AR | 75.0 | [25.0, 75.0] | P83 | Below average — days in ar suggests RCM improvement opportun |
| Clean Claim Rate | 98.0% | [80.0%, 98.0%] | P0 | Strong — predicted clean claim rate is in the top third. |
| Net Collection Rate | 99.5% | [90.0%, 99.5%] | P8 | Strong — predicted net collection rate is in the top third. |